[brookst]

Not the person you’re replying to, but RAM has historically been a boom-or-bust business, and companies that invest to meet demand during a boom cycle usually have that new capacity come online just in time for the bust.

If it was just variable costs and new capacity was available today they’d do it. But there are substantial fixed costs and delays to increasing capacity, and that uncertainty makes it risky.

[bigbadfeline]

That's such a nonsensical argument, it holds for every other business too and in this case it's just a lame excuse for monopolization. If you are that chicken and can't stomach competition you should not be in business anyway.

The current RAM manufactures were convicted of conspiracy to manipulate prices back in the 2000s or thereabout, doing so is their modus operandi, but this time the government is participating in the racket.

[rcxdude]

Chip manufacturing has unusually long spin-up times, high capital costs and relatively thin margins for anything but the latest and greatest processes, compared to most industries.

[bigbadfeline]

Well, let's remove the sanctions from China then and we'll get a better idea about costs and spin-times.

BTW all RAM is severely overpriced, not only the one using the latest process nodes.

[brookst]

You seem more invested in hating RAM manufacturers than interested in the actual economics of the business.

Look up Qiminda, ProMOS, Elpida. They invested in capacity during booms.

[hylaride]

There are other boom/bust businesses that have had waves of bankruptcies. The commodity sector is of particular note. You're seeing the same reluctance to spin up new oil rigs in the shale industry for similar reasons, despite record high energy prices.